Bergantino AE212; Part 2!!

[Vic]

LOL. My Quattro is my "light weight" 410 at 80 pounds. I was really getting tired of lifting that 98-pound D-410XLT into my car. Lifting the AE212 is kid stuff.

Ironically, I'm pretty sure I can date my lower back issues to my Eden 210XLT cabs... possibly the heaviest 210 cabs ever made at around 70 pounds each. I was holding one, lost my footing in a gravel lot, and cranked my back trying to avoid falling down. I never fell, but my back has never been the same.

 

[rodneyat]

Ironically, I'm pretty sure I can date my lower back issues to my Eden 210XLT cabs... possibly the heaviest 210 cabs ever made at around 70 pounds each. I was holding one, lost my footing in a gravel lot, and cranked my back trying to avoid falling down. I never fell, but my back has never been the same.

Those were great cabs but crazy heavy. I had a Metro 210 combo for years. I finally got tired of lugging that monster around and sold it about 6 years ago. I think that combo was 90lbs or so at the time. I think the newer ones are slightly lighter

 

[Chef]

SWR Redhead was the same way as the Metro: nice, and really heavy.

 

[scowboy]

I loved my Redhead but yeah in the end my back hated it.

I loved my Goliath SR. but in the end my back hated it.

I never loved my Warwick rig (which I bought stupid cheap) and in the end my back hated it.

I liked my TC Electronic rig and my back liked it better.

I love my AE212 and AE112 and my back loves them too!

SWR Redhead was the same way as the Metro: nice, and really heavy.

 

[John D Harris]

Ironically, I'm pretty sure I can date my lower back issues to my Eden 210XLT cabs... possibly the heaviest 210 cabs ever made at around 70 pounds each. I was holding one, lost my footing in a gravel lot, and cranked my back trying to avoid falling down. I never fell, but my back has never been the same.

I think the EA CX-210 were well over 70 lbs as well.
My CX-310 is 110 lbs.

 

[Jerry J]

I loved my Redhead but yeah in the end my back hated it.

I loved my Goliath SR. but in the end my back hated it.

I never loved my Warwick rig (which I bought stupid cheap) and in the end my back hated it.

I liked my TC Electronic rig and my back liked it better.

I love my AE212 and AE112 and my back loves them too!

Funny!

This is why I've never given a second look at Mesa cabinets. Crazy heavy

 

[rodl2005]

+1 MESA are ALL quality, but even the Walkabout- described as a featherweight combo..... - is a pretty solid li'l 12" cab & even WITH a NEO driver , aint light.
Schleppability is pretty good tho.



Just HAD to use that word ;-)

 

[Fretless5verfan]

Man...all this AE 212 praise is killing me! I'm thinking about making the AE212 and a Streamliner 600 my lightweight/small footprint compliment rig to my IP310 and Monique pre...hmm...

 

[Vic]

I'm probably gonna' be shot shot for saying this here, but I think I'm gonna' stick with my dual AE210 stack (my wallet sighs in relief ).

At least subjectively on stage last night, the low end extension the AE212 has over the AE210 stack was pretty much lost in the mix, and if anything, was maybe even a slight detriment. Minor thing on that tho, the main thing I missed was the upper mids. As soon as I switched to the AE212 I noticed a loss of presence that was a negative change for me.

Don't get spun up about this tho... a few points to make... it's not like the AE212 has an overly huge bottom... it doesn't, which IMHO is a specific feature of it over a lot of 212 cabs I've played. Also, the AE212 is one of the most mid present 212 cabs I've personally played through. Read me carefully on this tho... I am specifically saying mid present... not mid-forward. The AE212 is particularly even sounding for a 212 IMHO. That's a good thing. But I just still like the AE210's better. And finally, these are all "non-EQ" thoughts, and IMHO Berg cabs are among the best at taking EQ, if that makes any sense to y'all.

I had a pretty interesting way of testing this...

I literally stacked the 210's right next to the 212, and ran the 212 off one side of a Carvin BX1500 and the 210 stack off the other side. This literally gave me an identical everything that I could easily... even between songs... switch back and forth. It was super useful in really identifying the differences.

Now let me say that again in a different way. It was good to be able to switch quickly, because longer periods of time would've made it harder to really tell the differences. That's because, again, the AE212 is a particularly good 212 in terms of mid presence, IMHO.

I played an ash/maple Sadowsky JJ5 for a sharper J sound, my alder/rosewood Alleva Coppolo LG5 for a mellower J sound, and just for kicks, my new Jerzy Drozd, which is not only very modern sounding, but pretty mid-forward (tho for a Jerzy, it's pretty fat sounding... this one is a bit different than a lot of his stuff.). Even with the Jerzy, I tended to like the AE210's better, even tho I would say the AE210's are also mid-forward. The other end of the spectrum didn't fare as well for me. I really felt the AE212 didn't pair well with the LG5 without some EQ. The Sadwosky sounded great with both, but the ash/maple J-type sound is really "home base" with me as well, so keep that in mind.

Slight derail here, but one added pertinent thought... there's just something about the AE210's voicing that makes their mid-forward nature "ok" with me. Normally, I'd describe something particularly mid-forward as nasal or boxy, which I hate, but the AE210s just don't strike me that way for some reason.

I continue to be impressed with the AE212, but I'm keeping what I have. I'll just make one qualification... if I was playing a much sparser mix, I'd probably prefer the AE212. It's added low end extension would really do well to fill space down low in a really sweet way, where I think the added focus and tighter low end of the 210's would probably leave me reaching for the EQ. Not a big deal, again, Bergs take EQ wonderfully, but given a choice, I like to work with native voicing as much as possible... that goes for cabs, heads, and also basses.

Anyway, feel free to beat up on me all ya want, or ask questions, whatever.

Bottom line is, Jim's definitely got another winner here, but I'm gonna' stay my ground for now.

 

[Chef]

OK, you asked:
compare and contrast to the Berg AE212 to your GK 2 x 112 stack...

 

[Fretless5verfan]

Pulled the trigger on the AE212 and STM-600 from rocketmusic.net. I'll be posting up vid reviews in the not too distant future, so keep an eye out if you're interested!

 

[Vic]

OK, you asked:
compare and contrast to the Berg AE212 to your GK 2 x 112 stack...

It'd be more appropriate to compare it to the GK 212, but I don't have one of those, so given that caveat...

I didn't do this at the gig (not that much stage space), but at least at home, the GK's are way "bigger" sounding... mostly in the lows and especially in the low mids... I'd suppose around 150-200Hz or so... and maybe a bit crisper up high. They also, at least subjectively, seem louder FWIW. I would describe them as "less accurate" than the AE212, but, that's not necessarily bad, either. I also would stop short of saying the GK's are scooped, because even with their particularly big bottom, I don't miss mids in them when switching to them from the AE212.

From a transportability standpoint, IMHO, any dual 112 Neo rig will roast the AE212 (which includes the AE112's of course, not just the GK's). They're just insanely easy to lift and carry. I say this given I don't think folks would typically carry both 112's simultaneously, or the AE212, for very far. They're both generally a cart deal to move both 12's at the same time. However, at least with the 112's, you could make a couple of very very easy trips without a cart (or if you had a lot of stairs to deal with.) I really like the modular approach as you can tell.

 

[Chef]

yep, thx
i get all that...

 

[KJung]

I'm probably gonna' be shot shot for saying this here, but I think I'm gonna' stick with my dual AE210 stack (my wallet sighs in relief ).

At least subjectively on stage last night, the low end extension the AE212 has over the AE210 stack was pretty much lost in the mix, and if anything, was maybe even a slight detriment. Minor thing on that tho, the main thing I missed was the upper mids. As soon as I switched to the AE212 I noticed a loss of presence that was a negative change for me.

Don't get spun up about this tho... a few points to make... it's not like the AE212 has an overly huge bottom... it doesn't, which IMHO is a specific feature of it over a lot of 212 cabs I've played. Also, the AE212 is one of the most mid present 212 cabs I've personally played through. Read me carefully on this tho... I am specifically saying mid present... not mid-forward. The AE212 is particularly even sounding for a 212 IMHO. That's a good thing. But I just still like the AE210's better. And finally, these are all "non-EQ" thoughts, and IMHO Berg cabs are among the best at taking EQ, if that makes any sense to y'all.

I had a pretty interesting way of testing this...

I literally stacked the 210's right next to the 212, and ran the 212 off one side of a Carvin BX1500 and the 210 stack off the other side. This literally gave me an identical everything that I could easily... even between songs... switch back and forth. It was super useful in really identifying the differences.

Now let me say that again in a different way. It was good to be able to switch quickly, because longer periods of time would've made it harder to really tell the differences. That's because, again, the AE212 is a particularly good 212 in terms of mid presence, IMHO.

I played an ash/maple Sadowsky JJ5 for a sharper J sound, my alder/rosewood Alleva Coppolo LG5 for a mellower J sound, and just for kicks, my new Jerzy Drozd, which is not only very modern sounding, but pretty mid-forward (tho for a Jerzy, it's pretty fat sounding... this one is a bit different than a lot of his stuff.). Even with the Jerzy, I tended to like the AE210's better, even tho I would say the AE210's are also mid-forward. The other end of the spectrum didn't fare as well for me. I really felt the AE212 didn't pair well with the LG5 without some EQ. The Sadwosky sounded great with both, but the ash/maple J-type sound is really "home base" with me as well, so keep that in mind.

Slight derail here, but one added pertinent thought... there's just something about the AE210's voicing that makes their mid-forward nature "ok" with me. Normally, I'd describe something particularly mid-forward as nasal or boxy, which I hate, but the AE210s just don't strike me that way for some reason.

I continue to be impressed with the AE212, but I'm keeping what I have. I'll just make one qualification... if I was playing a much sparser mix, I'd probably prefer the AE212. It's added low end extension would really do well to fill space down low in a really sweet way, where I think the added focus and tighter low end of the 210's would probably leave me reaching for the EQ. Not a big deal, again, Bergs take EQ wonderfully, but given a choice, I like to work with native voicing as much as possible... that goes for cabs, heads, and also basses.

Anyway, feel free to beat up on me all ya want, or ask questions, whatever.

Bottom line is, Jim's definitely got another winner here, but I'm gonna' stay my ground for now.

This is accurate IMO and IME, and you can hear this clearly on my AE410/AE212 comparison clips on my Youtube channel. As you can also hear on my demonstration, with the right amp, you can really get each of the cabs close to one another... boosting the low mids around 200hz or so and boosting the upper mids around 1K can get the AE212 to sound quite a bit like the AE410, and vice versa.

I like both cabs a LOT, and prefer each for different contexts. However, it is that even voicing and the bigger low end that has the AE212 making me totally giddy on the gig, and it is now my primary gigging cab. That 'big low end but not scooped in the mids' is a rare find in a cab IMO.

A lot depends on the matching also. I would most likely not choose the AE212 with a really low end extended amp like the Mesa M6 or the GK micro's, but with the F500 (as an example), it is a match made in heaven. If you are really looking for that ash/maple aggression though, hard to beat the AE410. Different strokes. With a P Bass, whew, the AE212 is something else. It really does what my 410UL did, but much better... big low end, but as you say, MUCH more even through the mids and through that upper mid to tweeter transition (the wonder of Jim Bergantino's crossovers).

Jim Bergantino just announced a redesign of the AE210 by the way, and I'm assuming that will make the 2 x AE210 a bit closer to the AE410, and possibly result in a single one being a better stand alone solution. I'm looking forward to checking that out! (Edit: that is a pure guess... I have no info on what the redesign will be. My guess is that it will have the footprint of the AE410, and possible a front shelf port... making it more like 'half an AE410... but again, PURE guesswork on my part).

 

[Saluki]

On the one gig I have done with my AE212 it was with a limited PA and the drums were not isolated in a cage like my normal church gig, so the AE212 was perfect for supporting the sound on stage. I did use my GK MB200, which does have a lot of low end but it sounded great to me. I still like the natural upper mid aggressive of the AE410, so I boosted the upper mids on the MB200 a bit. The AE212 is a keeper for me, but for different application then the AE410. I think adding a single AE112 to the top of the AE212 would be great addition and if I did that I might be able to move to just using that instead of my AE410. Different flavors of great. Just IMO there from a bergantino fanboy.

I am intersted in hearing the AE212 next to Vics GK112 stack. If the GK stack extends lower, what about them tonally do you like better in the mix than the AE212 Vic? I know you like the portability of the GK112s better than the AE212, but how do you like the GK112s in the mix compared to your AE210s?

 

[Vic]

...with the right amp, you can really get each of the cabs close to one another...

Exactly... that's why I made sure to point out it was base voicing (no EQ)... to hopefully indicate to others (I know you already know) that it's not representative of what each rig "can do"... just where they sit before you tweak.

That said, if I was looking today for a cab to essentially be what I would personally consider a more traditional "410 sound", the AE212 would definitely be on my short list as a totally viable solution, and at about a 10 pound weight savings over the lightest 410's currently on the market, and being a much easier carry as well, pretty darn compelling.

Jim Bergantino just announced a redesign of the AE210 by the way, and I'm assuming that will make the 2 x AE210 a bit closer to the AE410, and possibly result in a single one being a better stand alone solution. I'm looking forward to checking that out! (Edit: that is a pure guess... I have no info on what the redesign will be. My guess is that it will have the footprint of the AE410, and possible a front shelf port... making it more like 'half an AE410... but again, PURE guesswork on my part).

Somebody posted previously (I was thinking here) that he's just redoing them to be more oriented towards the vertical stack. We're supposing at the very least that means putting feet and cups on the short sides instead of the long sides, but at least I haven't heard anything definitive on it yet, so he could be doing more. Unknown.

One thing I also still very much like about the dual AE210's is, since I've always vertically stacked mine, I get better near field monitoring on smaller stages, AND, they're shallower, which also gives me more flexibility in stage positioning. Small stuff real specific to my situation, but it is what it is.

 

[KJung]

Somebody posted previously (I was thinking here) that he's just redoing them to be more oriented towards the vertical stack. We're supposing at the very least that means putting feet and cups on the short sides instead of the long sides, but at least I haven't heard anything definitive on it yet, so he could be doing more. Unknown.

One thing I also still very much like about the dual AE210's is, since I've always vertically stacked mine, I get better near field monitoring on smaller stages, AND, they're shallower, which also gives me more flexibility in stage positioning. Small stuff real specific to my situation, but it is what it is.

That would be cool if he would do a pure vertical thing like the RS210. I like that a lot.

On the depth thing, interestingly, when you take into account that you need to leave about 6" of space behind the cab for the rear ports, I think the AE410 is actually 'thinner' in the space it takes on stage than the AE210. That is one of the only things I don't particularly like about the AE212. While port position doesn't matter tonally, I enjoy being able to cram my cases behind the AE410 on stage or put the cab right up against the wall on small stages, etc. Not a huge deal though.

 

[Vic]

On the depth thing, interestingly, when you take into account that you need to leave about 6" of space behind the cab for the rear ports...

That's not what I understand. I remember getting into this in the Mesa Walkabout Scout threads because of the down firing passive radiator. The usual cab design experts chimed in and said you only need enough space for the air to escape... just enough that you don't get "woofing"... which wouldn't take much at all. In fact, if you have enough to clear the speakon plugs, you're good.

 

[KJung]

That's not what I understand. I remember getting into this in the Mesa Walkabout Scout threads because of the down firing passive radiator. The usual cab design experts chimed in and said you only need enough space for the air to escape... just enough that you don't get "woofing"... which wouldn't take much at all. In fact, if you have enough to clear the speakon plugs, you're good.

Not sure that is correct, and also while a passive radiator serves a port function, it is not a port (different rules there, I believe). I agree on the passive radiator. The general consensus seems that around 5 or 6" will allow the air to flow unimpeded from a rear port.

I'd leave a bit more space if I were you.

 

[Vic]

Not sure that is correct, and also while a passive radiator serves a port function, it is not a port (different rules there, I believe). I agree on the passive radiator. The general consensus seems that around 5 or 6" will allow the air to flow unimpeded from a rear port.

I'd leave a bit more space if I were you.

I just did a bit of quick digging and you're right, folks do recommend 6" from a wall for a rear ported cab.

There's a lot of talk about cab placement in general also mattering quite a bit, so in my case, the few times I was actually close to a wall, the rear-ported part of it musta' been lost in the mix of overall placement effects.

Anyway, wrapped. FYI/FWIW.